Paul Chrisp, the director of the centre for guidelines at Nice, said: “What we’re saying is that, for people with a less than 10% risk over 10 years of a first heart attack or stroke, the decision to take a statin should be left to individual patients after an informed discussion of benefits and risks.
“The evidence is clear, in our view, that for people with a risk of 10% or less over 10 years, statins are an appropriate choice to reduce that risk.”
Does this not sound bonkers? If you have a less that 1% chance a year of a heart attack a statin is still an appropriate choice?
I know I'm being frivolous and that 10% over 10 years doesn't really equal 1% a year but it still seems weird to me.
what never fails to surprise me is the willingness to swallow anything “prescribed”. I don’t know how many generations it will take for healthcare to be seen as a joint enterprise between an individual and providers
Also the government could do a lot more by forcing companies to drastically reduce the amount of salt and sugar for instance, in food, especially the low-cost rubbish people seem addicted to. No, they won't do that because it interferes with big business profits. Who cares for us ultimately?
I 100% agree that we shouldn't be eating processed food but for so many people it's all they can afford.
If you remove salt and sugar from the food, which are acting as preservatives, you'll see 2 things happen. First the number of other additives will go up to replace the salt and sugar. Awful chemical preservatives. Second, the price will rise dramatically because salt and sugar are SO cheap. If that happens you'll see a huge increase in poverty... and that will lead to a greater strain on resources and all the other ripple effects.
We already don't pay our farmers what they should be paid. Financially, my household brings in more than many and we can't afford to shop organic or local. So we're left with supermarket food - even the fresh stuff isn't fresh - and it's covered in pesticides which are just as damaging to our health as salt and sugar.
Strawberries 'fresh' on the shelves have been frozen for a year before being defrosted as needed. Fresh squeezed orange juice has been stored in million gallon vats for over a year before it gets decanted into a plastic bottle and shipped to Asda.
I agree with all that you say but there still seems to me to be room for improvement. If we collectively do nothing things won't improve. For instance most crisps have far too much salt on them in the flavourings. Even lightly salted ones are still too salty. As I moved to low salt for my heart it has become clear that my tastes have changed over time. So, even slight improvements can have a positive result and it was done with sugar in drinks so I still think ways can be found. However, political will is needed and the profiting food and drink companied do not care about health, just sales. Health is important whether or not you have a large income or not.
"and it was done with sugar in drinks so I still think ways can be found. "
i would agree with that if it means "getting yourself gradually used to the taste of less sugar in your tea".
but if you mean "the reduction of sugar in drinks on the shop shelf" .. really ??
have you seen the stuff they're putting into replace the reduced sugar ... it's now common to see 2 or 3 different artificial sweeteners in one lower sugar drink , and i've never been convinced they are as harmless as they make out. (and they taste horrible ~sweeter than the 'originals' but in a much nastier sort of way) , Personally I think it would have been 'healthier' to persuade people to drink less of the original versions rather than feed them more aspartame and whatever else they are putting in.
Of course but all that happened with the sugar tax was that we paid more for drinks; it did naff all to the bottom line for fizzy drink makers. It didn't change consumption.
Asda lemonade is 60p for 2 litres with 5.8g sugar in.
1lb of sugar costs 14p. So the sugar in the lemonade costs 0.001p. even a 100% tax on sugar content wouldn't cost much to the manufacturer.
I know thats pessimistic but I think changing the law would do more harm than good at this point. Until salaries reflect cost of living and inflation it's an impossible mountain to climb. Until we can pay more for good quality food, as a whole society, we just need to keep bellies full, unfortunately.
To be fair, doctors would be needed within the radical healthcare changes that I believe are necessary.... at least initially. For example, when conditions are acute because theyve been left to develop too far. Nutritional Therapists would stop such a development so, over time, there could/should be less need for medics and more call for NTs.
The cost saving on drugs makes this possible financially (OUR money funding the NHS would be less) but unlikely if big pharma remains in control.
Interesting that their denial of the dangers of statins especially for women does not make them think nor the truth that 85 % of HA victims have low cholesterol. How about muscle atrophy, diabetes, kidney failure, plaque in arteries hardening and on and on all attributed to statins.
I think that says my result is C;C so "17x myopathy risk for statin users". If so that confirms I really will never take statins. Is that right; I don't understand what I'm looking at really?
My Cholestrol markers all went down (apart from Total) in my results last week. Thyroid getting into balance, better nutrition and exercising again.
the film statin nation on YouTube says it all - is about medical corruption. Shows they are more interested in the wealth in their pocket than the health of patients.
I knew about it but as I've resisted statins I hadn't watched it. Absolutely awful how profits come so strongly before our health. An terrible scandal that most pharmaceutical research is done by the manufacturers themselves, and they don't need to make it public. Same goes for the creation of the covid vaccines amongst many others I'm convinced.
My husband was on Simvastatin for years, getting all sorts of muscle problems (weakness) and it also gave him Type 2 Diabetes! I finally persuaded him to stop them by showing him Malcolm Kendrick’s work on statins and, thankfully, the muscle wastage was reversed and he manages his diabetes by diet alone. Statins are the devil’s work and you won’t get me taking them for all the tea in China!
That is good news Zephyrbear. I have very bad myalgia and I learned early on about statins (20 years ago) and stopped them immediately. I wonder if my very short time on statins has contributed to this very chronic form of myalgia and long time waiting in the wings Type 2 diabetes BUT maybe it has been my hypothyroidism all along. Highly likely. Anyway the point is thank you for giving us your husband’s good news of recovery. It’s excellent for him and hope for the rest of us.
I often wonder the same thing after 3 different statins then different strengths due to their horrible physical and mental side effects. Since i quit, aches and pains still every day plus a year later the vaccines and got covid and had to fight with my doc about slightly over tsh.
Hi scotsrish. Scots/Irish? If so me too. Anyway it’s nice you picked up on this. Statins definitely to be avoided. I read your two previous posts on the Heart forum. I can’t speak for your previous heart stuff where you got stents - stents were discussed with me too before I had my heart attack twenty years ago. A very sensible cardiologist decided it would not be a good idea for me as my arteries were clear but the very ‘rare’ angina that I was experiencing he thought might just move to another part of the heart arteries. Anyway twenty years on (if any GP or doctor of any kind would listen) I am convinced my problem has always been hypothyroidism. We have to work everything out for ourselves. It all takes time and it’s an utter pain. The longer I have my accompanying myalgia without T3 the more I am observing things about me/my illness. I just get more and more annoyed with our treatment and the depth of our illness is an area of complete ignorance to most medics. The band around your/my chest (which is a classic symptom of heart attack and/or angina) I have found to be simply, for over twenty years, to be due to hypothyroidism. The muscles, including the big old heart muscles are the problem. They are not ‘weak’, they are collapsing under the lack of T3, in my opinion. As I say can’t speak for you really as I have no idea whether your arteries were occluded or not. My arteries twenty years post heart attack may well be occluded now and off course I am a bit wary of that, particularly when ‘they’ have let me go another twenty years undiagnosed/unmediated. I noticed a big big difference in my muscles whilst briefly on T3 but for heart reasons I had to stop. Still in the process of working out why? However think I might be understanding more about the why and hoping to get back on T3 without difficult side effects - They are not even aware of the information that is presently available; never mind put their minds to the problems right in front of them. I am convinced it’s a T3 problem that I will eventually work around. Best wishes.
Yes Scottish and Irish. It is a catch 22 situation because on the one hand they warn about starting meds for hypothyroid because of heart then the other warning is what failing thyroid can do to the Heart! including heart attack. I am extremely drug sensitive and was started on 1/2 a 25 mcg of synthroid. Went ok for a few months then tsh still higher end plus fatigue, joint pains, palputations yadda yadda so i upped it to 3/4 a tab and now a full 25 mcg which is giving me heartburn, mild palputations and gut issues PLUS this crazy hunger? I don't get it the damage low hormones and tsh can do can be very serious including heart attacks yet here in BC Canada they keep on moving the numbers on the thyroid testing scale up refusing other tests but tsh and ignoring the blatant symptoms. I trust Health Canada less than a rattler under my bed. Read and educate yourself plus healthy diet and exercise as your foundation.
After an increase in T4 (and some sneaky T3) in October, my cholesterol and triglyceride levels have seen a good improvement in my blood tests last week. My GP has previously suggested statins but I don't want to go there.
I was given high dose statins because my cholesterol was 17, from being normal( no one seemed to ask why?) I felt awful and GP referred me to a statins clinic, against my wishes. Then she checked my thyroid. I wasn't on thyroid meds then but had become increasingly ill over a year during covid lockdown when the NHS weren't seeing anybody. Bald patches, swollen tongue, bruising, extreme gastro problems and many more. TSH was over 160, no T4! Started levo and within 6 months all cholesterol measures were perfectly normal. The doc dismissed it as 'must have been your thyroid'. I was annoyed that statins had been the first choice for someone with an unexplained cholesterol level of 17 with so many awful symptoms which she had said were due to stress!
We are constantly asking the same question. But how is it that doctor training - for a very common illness - misses this out. Are less common (rarer illnesses) any better ‘doctored’? I do not know but every day, the stories on here continue to shock me to the core. How much can we trust our medics really? We must continue to educate ourselves.
OMG Lulu, i will never understand why (since hypothyroidism is so 'common') it never seems to occur to GP's to test for it routinely BEFORE assuming it's 'something else' . Nobody thought to test me for 4 yrs after having a baby . and yet 'after having a baby' must surely be the most common time for thyroids to go wonky.... fortunately they only tried to send me to a shrink , not feed me statins.
What is this indicative going to cost, I would think £300 million plus must have been allowed… very odd to announce it when the NHS is in crisis, and millions needed for medics, more beds and carers? I personally got rid of them after over a decade believing they were doing me some good, but had painful legs, and years later cholesterol blood results show they were not needed anyway!
Every so often an article like this appears in the papers. Perhaps the PR machine of big pharma think it’s time to do another ‘awareness raising’ or more likely their coffers could be doing with a bit of a boost. Normally I like the Guardian but I am fed up with these ‘pieces’. The evidence is available (nobody reading that?!) and yet this c..p gets trotted out regularly. Can’t make up my mind if there might be some tongue in cheek in the article but if it was, it’s too subtle for me, it will be too subtle for others too. Tut tut Guardian, some pretty shoddy reporting.
I took the rather cynical view that due to the colossal struggles within the NHS they dont want stroke and heat attack patients clogging up the corridors. So stick everyone on statins as its cheaper than actually treating people. I wont be taking them.
OMG Sparklingsunshine you really are firing on all cylinders. It is a remarkable Co-incidence. A bit like something being put out to avoid something worse getting out - politically that is. Afraid that horse has bolted.
I knew a consultant something or other for a while, socially. He had the most kamikaze outlook on his health and advised everyone at the time to eat what they heck they liked (I do agree with that one) and just take the statins to counter it (I never agreed with that crazy idea).
I think there's something psychological that happens when these sorts of announcements that ABC service/product will be available for x amount of million people more...the wording of it means people feel like they're being given a sort of present. A bonus. Something they were formerly deprived of is now available to them and will be rolled out to all! It was always there, but you were previously denied it, you had no access to it, as it was only available for a select bunch of people. Now due to altruistic concern for your health you do. You are not being left out, your heart will not give out unnoticed or without intervention. Help will be given.
And of course it's spoken about in cheery tones by people with authority.
It's a bit like me feeling I've received a treat when there's a knock at my door and my Amazon parcel arrives, despite me having ordered and paid for it.
The Guardians article is so biased - it made me wonder if big pharma's PR had written it? Maybe the paper was paid good money for it? If not their researcher needs shooting! I thought The Guardian was more balanced in its articles.....clearly not!!
So my risk factor is 18% GP told me. She didnt tell me how that score was precisely arrived at.
Cholesterol levels all in range. I'm a stone overweight....sigh, my age, being a woaman doesnt help (not that they've done much research on the effects of statins on women. . This I guess is because I have Hypothyroidism, cardiotoxicity damage from necessary cancer treatment causing P-Atrial Fibulation. Am I long termly at risk of a heart attack....probably but not due to life style but chemical heart damage. How on earth is a statin going to stop that!! That's the problem with generic assessments......its a tick box. Has patient AF? Yes......ah statin then
Nonsense. I've just read the research showing it can cause cardiotoxicity! Give me strength!! Never mind its contrary indicated for hypothyroidism and a heart drug I do need to take. And my EP has never mentioned it....probably because he has used his brain and realised nothing can fix cancer treatment cardiotoxicity! And nor do I need added stress to my currently well functioning liver and kidneys. Who are these doctors??? The nations health is reduced to a computer programme tick box? Who designed the programme?
QofL is what I'm interested in!! They can stuff their day or two extra of longevity it affords me at great cost to the NHS! NHS please use the money elsewhere on the 7 million waiting for ops etc would be handy!!
Could not agree more. This morning I read Sajid Jhavids comments on the NHS and the need to change for it to survive. One of his main issues was paying for GP appointments. Weeellll can I just say I would NOT pay for a useless appointment with one of these doctors for 7 minutes of their time. I would expect them to be a lot more knowledgable, take more time and properly serve/help their patients. Many of them just would not get the business. With the internet and all, word would soon get around about their incompetence= no job. There are two reasons we put up with the shoddy service at all! 1. There are not a lot of options. 2. We already pay for this service. By all means ‘punish’ people who don’t regularly turn up for appointments - not everyone though. Although it’s difficult arranging an appointment - has anyone tried cancelling one? They really ought to have another number for cancellations. One just loses the will to live and I object strongly to their huge introductory speeches before you can get to anything you actually need to do. It’s so ‘Dark Ages’. They are so out of touch. The NHS needs sweeping change but so long as it is a ticky box system no-one will benefit - apart from those lucky enough to come across a doctor not too pi..ed off with his/her job. There was a time when doctors were respected (Gods) but not now. We trust them with something of extreme value to us, our lives, our childrens lives, our grandchildrens lives. They are not always competent and the ticky box system allows even more incompetent doctors to stay in the game. Who wants to go over to a system which is wholly privately funded? It’s a money pit. Get the NHS healthy. I better stop here before my blood pressure goes through the roof.
Of course let's not forget they've been starving the NHS of proper funding for 12yrs......that & an aging population with an inverted triangle.....ie more older people at the top and much fewer youngers ones at the bottom has meant that even if they had matched the funding it wouldn't be enough. Politicians have known about this for decades but never planned for it....but the Conservatives have used it to disable the NHS until it can't function......& then they can say a new approach is needed! Disgusting!
privatisation and the decline of the NHS as we knew it it was already in process before the last labour gvt got in, and unfortunately they did nothing to stop it , they encouraged it with PFI / defunding mental health services / drug and alcohol dependency services ... then the cons. govt carried on full steam ahead as soon as they got back in . This is Loooong Train ...and it's not stopping now.
We will be having a base line underfunded /overwhelmed public service for those that have no option... and a private service for anyone that can afford it .
We already have a two tier health system Tattyboogle.
But I tell you there are few that can afford private cancer treatment or expensive operations etc & given 1in2 people get cancer at some point in their lives I think its time we started fighting for our NHS not giving up.
On a personal note the NHS has saved my life 3xs during my life. I could not possibly afford private. No insurance plan would take me on now...there would be so many exclusions it wouldnt be wirth having. And as my Mum discovered a s soon as she developed a need for an operation after great health for many years the premiums shot up so much she couldn't afford it.
Believe me the Loooong train needs to be turned round. Or the next generation will truly suffer.
i agree , but neither colour is going to do it..... their course is set already, and probably impossible to get out of now even it they wanted to due to PFI .. and one or other of them is going to get 'in' again. So we can shout all we like , it's happening , it's happened already while most people were asleep .
if there was any intention to change this direction and make the NHS continue as it used to (free at point of use for all AND top quality care for all) , the community care system would have been improved to take the pressure off , the incentives for staff to stay in NHS would have been improved , and recruitment would have been increased.
They haven't been .. so it will fail , just like the titanic , and "private health insurance" or "NHS last resort of the desperate and uninsured take it or leave it and be grateful they let you in at all " will be the only options . same model as US
And how do you get people to accept going private ...run it down so much that the service is so over stretched/ and underfunded that is unbearable to use and doesn't feel like the 'safety net' is safe anymore , so that everyone who can do so will choose to find a private route to get their treatment started in a reasonable timescale rather than wait years .. already happening , Start to prompt patients towards private services via the NHS,.... already happening.
... no other outcome is really possible given the upside down demographic triangle , unless the country votes for the "save our NHS now party" .. which i'm pretty sure doesn't exist .
i don't like it at all , but this is how i see what has been happening, and in my opinion it is a choice that has already been made . They'll all make noises that sound like they are trying to fix it , but i reckon those noises are disingenuous.
I hear what you are saying tattyboogle. And if that is what the nation wants that is what it will get!! Everything in life has a price and nothing is free.....including the NHS. We have been paying for it ever since its inception. Its a nonsense to say it's free. And as for privatisation......the whole nation has slept walked passed education being privatised without any protest. Barely noticed. So if our country wants this we are fast approaching victorian times when people starved, died of cold and education was for the rich only. There was no state education system then or NHS. At the end of the day we vote these people in! The nation has sadly allowed this. Apathy is destroying this country not the two major parties as we vote them in. You write as if we have no power.....we do......but without doubt we are giving it away.
Yes all that you say is true and I have experience of working in many inefficient businesses. However the administration in the NHS takes the biscuit. It is so old fashioned and built on a ‘military’ basis. Orders from above which brook no questioning. Throwing money at it, which has been tried I don’t know how many times, just has not worked. It truly does need exceptionally strong leadership which is not easily come by. Someone might have it - it’s a huge organisation and ‘good practice’ must be in there somewhere. Whilst I hate to say (when I worked there) there was such a lot of ill will and empire building still in evidence. There is also an enormous amount of good will too but somehow it keeps going back to the military style, where the people working hard never seem to benefit.
I can immediately think of a bunch of patients it would pay to work with efficiently; which could prevent so many unnecessarily unwell elderly people with complicated cases bedblocking etc!
And private care will be better to work in and the nations health will benifit? You would then enjoy seeing a bunch of patients who would benefit from this or that......but wait.....they dont have the money to put in place what would work....or a few rich souls do......but then they already have that don't they if they want it. Am not saying the NHS doesn't have problems.....it does. Big ones. It has been the butt of politicians manifestos for years rather than being properly managed. I've met many of the Ego's you talk of.....nightmare. but dismantle g it completely will be regretted in future years. We all have seen what has happened to dentistry and opticians. It just means that those that have the wealth will be fine, some people will cherry pick what they can afford & maybe not what they really need and the rest will be left to go without. This is better?
No it’s definitely not better. My principles have been severely tested by having hypothyroidism long before it was diagnosed. I battled on, like many of us. I was led to believe it was just ‘me’. Sometimes I was told nicely (patronising) and sometimes not so nicely (stimulating anger). However the most surprising, or perhaps it’s because it’s the most recent part of the process, is this bit. Prescribing. I assumed that once I got here I would be treated properly. Free at point of need. It’s difficult to accept, considering the vast amount of money previously wasted on me whilst undiagnosed, that now I am diagnosed the NHS is basically refusing to treat me properly. It’s insane. Anyway this is where my principles have really come to be tested as I have gone ‘private’. I am amazed at my ‘principles’ being pushed aside to get well. I feel guilty. It does not sit properly. I very much feel we are losing something very precious and civilising. I agree with both yours and tattybogle comments and feel your frustration too. I am (perhaps stupidly) hoping I can get well enough to do something/contribute something, to make the situation better. However I feel ‘timed out’. The world has changed. Peoples attitudes have changed. Sometimes I think that people are unaware of what has gone on before, to reach this incredible height of civilisation. The NHS with all its many faults? Taken too much for granted. I fear, like tattybogle it is too damaged to survive.
a dentistry example.. a nice bloke lives near me (ex alcholholic,) i noticed he's started drinking again,... have a chat or two ....'' rampant toothache" (self medicating with brandy cos it's to got too bad for OTC painkillers).
Once upon a time this would have been relatively easy to sort and get someone back on track ~make them an appointment at the local dentist (they may have had to wait 8 months to get an NHS place , but it would at least happen) .... take them to it (with their arm up their back if needed) ... et viola .... get back on the wagon .
So i tried .. he got sent for an "Emergency NHS appointment" (with a private dentist) .. he went .. he came back with antibiotics having been told that he would need to find £500 quid for a root canal ( £500 is not possible for him , not happening , forget it ) ...." what were the other options ?" i asked , "what did they say they could do if you can't get £500 ...can they just take it out ? "
" they didn't give me any other options "
Brandy will probably be staying on the menu then .
... which will cost everybody so much more than sorting him out on the NHS would . if he could get on the books of an NHS dentist ( he can't ,none here are taking anybody else on for years to come ) i'd pay his NHS £50 bill just cos he's nice bloke when he's not drunk and it's a crying shame to see him go back that way again .
my 93 father just admitted to hospital with broken hip -The staff couldn’t believe he wasn’t on any drugs especially blood thinners they seemed obsessed (I can’t imagine how he managed to get so old without them)
I feel sure he’ll be given them before he gets out and they will go straight in the recycling
How interesting. I had a phonecall out of the blue from the ‘GP’s Pharmacist’ he said I’d been identified as having high cholesterol and would I like to go on Statins. I said no. I am not aware of having had my cholesterol tested, so how did they come to this conclusion? i was caught on the hop and didn’t think to ask at the time. If it was not impossible to get an appointment with the GP I could ask. I’ve checked my NHS health record and can see nothing on there except the record of his call; which I supposed at least confirms it’s genuine and not a scam call.
Fortunately , even though flustered , you remembered the advice from those 1980's bill boards designed to save us all from peer pressure to take drugs.
it was rolling laughing crying face and up the right way laughing crying face 🌱(green seedling- I’ve dropped the jealous heart, couldn’t deal with that 🤭 hand over mouth giggle)
I think I'd prefer to listen to a consultant cardiologist for >21yrs (see video in link below). His views on covid vaccine also worthwhile for same reason.Re risk analysis, the algorithm used by NHS etc could be challenged (there are others). Also its parameters essentially mean most/all exceed 10% risk at relatively young ages so medics would suggest statins for them. Interesting that the 10% figure was 20% not long ago - seems to correspond with falling statin use!!
Is it just me? I can’t ever fully follow/translate Facebook, Instagram and Twitter. I always feel like I am coming in halfway through a conversation and I don’t know how to get the previous info. I give up.
My 23andme test provides access to several reports on specific genetic issues, including several on drug responses.
For Simvastatin, it says:
The C version of the SNP rs4149056 is one of the most common variants associated with simvastatin myopathy. The variant (rs4149056) changes the structure and function of the protein encoded by SLCO1B1. This variant is also called 521T->C, Val174Ala or SLCO1B1*5. Multiple studies have shown that people with the genotypes CC or CT at rs4149056 are at higher risk for statin myopathy than people with the TT genotype.
This genetic association has not yet been firmly established for other types of statins. At least one small study suggests that rs4149056 may not be associated with atorvastatin (Lipitor®) myopathy. Another study, however, suggests that this variant is associated with cerivastatin (Baycol®, Lipobay®) myopathy. Cerivastatin was withdrawn from the market in 2001 because too many people experienced serious myopathy.
Content on HealthUnlocked does not replace the relationship between you and doctors or other healthcare professionals nor the advice you receive from them.
Never delay seeking advice or dialling emergency services because of something that you have read on HealthUnlocked.
Health: A new spin on statins
statin or not
Statins
New and require guidence from new extended friends
